webodec3ARCHIVEPreview
Open in TheBrain

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft

---

cave trump pro bono

---

above the law

Donald Trump has ben busy using the questionable power of Executive Orders to target Biglaw firms like Covington & Burling, then Perkins Coie, Paul Weiss, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale. All for the grievous insult of having their attorneys take cases that Donald Trump or his allies just don’t like. And more than that, Trump has had wild success using the mere threat of EOs and the financial harmthey bring to get major firms (Skadden, Milbank, Willkie, probably Kirkland) to do his bidding. (Generally, providing millions in pro bono services for conservative causes/clients and abandoning the firm’s DEI efforts.)

According to reporting bythe New York Times, the next firm in the President’s crosshairs is Cadwalader. Not for cases they *did* take but for one specific one they didn’t. Former Cadwalader partner Todd Blanche disagreed with his onetime partners about taking Trump on as a client.

But in 2023, when Mr. Trump was facing multiple criminal investigations and Mr. Blanche wanted to represent him, most of the firm’s leadership balked at the idea, according to people with knowledge of the matter.

So, Mr. Blanche left Cadwalader, hanging out his own legal shingle and expressing bitterness to some allies that he had to do so to take on Mr. Trump as a client, one of the people said.

Now Trump wants retribution on Blanche’s behalf. And, honestly, it sounds an awful lot like a shakedown.

One of Mr. Trump’s advisers has been in touch with the firm to suggest that it sign a deal in which it would offer tens of millions of dollars in pro bono legal services to causes that the Trump administration supports.

It’s unclear, at this point, if Cadwalader will capitulate to these demands or take a stand. But all of Biglaw is watching.

---

reuters

Summary

April 25 (Reuters) - An association of more than 700 partners at major U.S. law firms submitted a court brief on Friday supporting Susman Godfrey in its federal lawsuit challenging U.S. President Donald Trump's executive order against the firm.

Trump's punitive orders targeting Susman and other law firms "threaten the legal profession, the judiciary, and the rule of law itself," the filing said.

The friend-of-the-court brief, opens new tab, filed in Susman's case in Washington, D.C., by the non-profit Law Firm Partners United, comes as some lawyers have split with their firms over the response to Trump's intensifying crackdown on the legal profession.

At least 110 individual law partners signed the brief. The filing said the association's more than 700 members, all partners at the 200 largest law firms in the US by revenue, were supporting Susman in their personal capacities, not on behalf of their firms.

The signatories included three partners from law firms that reached deals with Trump to avoid White House actions like the Susman executive order. The partners and their firms - Cadwalader, Simpson Thacher and Willkie Farr - did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The lawyers' organization said in a statement that its members "are driven by a collective commitment to protect the rule of law in the United States."

Susman Godfrey sued earlier this month to block Trump's order, which restricted its lawyers' access to government buildings and officials, and threatened to cancel federal contracts held by its clients.

The executive order accused Susman Godfrey of undermining U.S. elections, which it has denied. The firm has represented machine voting company Dominion Voting Systems in defamation lawsuits against Trump's allies who repeated false claims that the 2020 election was rigged in favor of Democrat Joe Biden.

"Orders like this tell the entire profession that taking on cases and clients that are out of favor with the current administration may result in severe retaliation," Friday's brief said.

Judges have already issued rulings temporarily blocking key provisions of Trump's similar orders against Susman; Perkins Coie; WilmerHale; and Jenner & Block; finding that the president's actions likely violated constitutional protections for free speech and due process.

Wednesday's ruling from the Manhattan-based Court of International Trade ...

All four firms have asked the federal court in Washington to permanently strike down Trump's orders. The Justice Department has argued that Trump acted within his authority to penalize the firms for allegedly working to "weaponize" the legal system against him and his allies.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the lawyers' brief.

Nine other law firms have pledged $940 million so far in free legal work and made other concessions to Trump in efforts to rescind or avoid punitive measures against them, leading some lawyers at the firms to quit in response.

Most of the largest U.S. law firms have remained on the sidelines. Only a handful of major firms have joined court briefs supporting law firms that are suing the Trump administration.

Law professors, advocacy groups, state attorneys general, former top legal executives at large companies and others have also filed court briefs in support of the challenges.

Reporting by Sara Merken, David Thomas and Mike Scarcella

:{:{---}:

---

cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft plans to ask Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez in New York if he needs free legal help defending convictions on appeal or handling other matters.

The law firm thinks that the work would provide valuable experience to junior lawyers while satisfying its pledge to provide $100 million in pro bono work to causes supported by the firm and President Donald Trump, Bloomberg Law reports.

Nicholas Gravante, co-chair of Cadwalader’s global litigation group, told Bloomberg Law about the plan in an interview.

“If we can deploy some talented attorneys to assist Eric in that office, that is something I am confident would be viewed as meeting the obligations,” he said.

Cadwalader is one of nine firms that agreed to pro bono deals to avoid punitive executive orders that generally call for the suspension of lawyers’ security clearances and imperil their clients’ government contracts. But Cadwalader “faces a steeper climb” to reach $100 million in pro bono hours because it is smaller than the eight other dealmaking firms, the article says.

Gravante said the firm will fulfill its pledge, even if it takes 20 years to do so.

---

beast

:{:{A famed New York law firm’s $100-million pro bono deal with President Donald Trump is backfiring as employees jump ship in anger. The Wall Street Journal reported that lawyers are exiting Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft in anger after the firm committed to providing free legal services in support of Trump. Cadwalader, NY’s oldest firm, made the deal to skate punitive damages made by Trump’s February flurry of executive orders targeting law firms that he said were “weaponizing” the legal system against him. Cadwalader was also among three other firms—A&O Shearman, Latham & Watkins, Simpson Thacher—that claimed their independence has not been compromised despite deals with Trump, according to letters dated April 28, Reuters reported.}:

However, Cadwalader’s exiting employees appear unconvinced. Sources told theJournalthat the key partner in the firm’s litigation group is heading to a smaller firm, along with other litigators planning their outs. J.B. Howard, a former Maryland deputy attorney general and counsel at the firm, is also reportedly on the outs after protesting the firm’s Trump deal. “Departures can be tough,” a firm spokesperson told theJournal. “Some attrition is normal and expected; it is part of the typical rhythm of a successful firm.”}:

---

ggl 5 25

Cadwalader Partners Hit Exit Following Firm's Deal With ...

_Bloomberg Law News_

https://news.bloomberglaw.com › business-and-practice](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/cadwalader-partners-hit-exit-following-firms-deal-with-trump)

May 9, 2025 — Cadwalader and eight other law firms have pledged $940 million in free legal work in deals with Trump to avoid punitive executive orders ...

[### Two Cadwalader Partners Exit Over The Firm's ... Above the Law

https://abovethelaw.com › 2025/05 › two-cadwalader-pa...](https://abovethelaw.com/2025/05/two-cadwalader-partners-exit-over-the-firms-capitulation-to-donald-trump/)

May 12, 2025 — Cadwalder and eight other law firms have pledged $940 million in free legal work in deals with Trump to avoid punitive executive orders like ...

[### 2025-4-18-blumenthal-raskin-letter-to-cadwalader- ...

U.S. House Judiciary Committee Democrats (.gov)

https://democrats-judiciary.house.gov › 2025-4-1...](https://democrats-judiciary.house.gov/uploadedfiles/2025-4-18-blumenthal-raskin-letter-to-cadwalader-002.pdf)

PDF

Apr 18, 2025 — We write today regarding President Trump's April 11, 2025, announcement that. Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP (“Cadwalader”) reached an ...

5 pages

[### Cadwalader Feels The Fallout From Cowardly Trump Deal Above the Law

https://abovethelaw.com › 2025/05 › cadwalader-feels-th...](https://abovethelaw.com/2025/05/cadwalader-feels-the-fallout-from-cowardly-trump-deal/)

May 9, 2025 — When the firm finalized their Trump deal on April 11 –pledging $100 million in pro bono payola — they were already seeing some noteworthy ...

[### Cadwalader plans to do this to satisfy pro bono deal with ...

ABA Journal

https://www.abajournal.com › news › article › cadwalade...](https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/cadwalader-plans-to-do-this-to-satisfy-pro-bono-deal-with-trump)

8 days ago — The law firm thinks that the work would provide valuable experience to junior lawyers while satisfying its pledge to provide $100 million in pro ...

[### Another Law Firm Braces for Possible Blowback From Trump

The New York Times

https://www.nytimes.com › U.S. › Politics](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/07/us/politics/law-firms-trump-cadwalader-wickersham-taft.html)

Apr 7, 2025 — Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft balked at having one of its partners represent Donald Trump in his criminal cases. Now the firm is among those that have been ...

[### Exclusive: Cadwalader, Wickersham & ...

Facebook · The Wall Street Journal

4.8K+ reactions · 3 weeks ago](https://www.facebook.com/WSJ/posts/exclusive-cadwalader-wickersham-taft-struck-a-deal-with-president-trump-last-mon/1067181101935153/)

Exclusive: Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft struck a deal with President Trump last month intended to secure the future of New York's oldest law ...

[### Cadwalader Looks to Fight Criminal Appeals to Meet ...

Bloomberg Law News

https://news.bloomberglaw.com › business-and-practice](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/cadwalader-looks-to-fight-criminal-appeals-to-meet-trump-pledge)

May 21, 2025 — Cadwalader has also engaged in behavior that has prompted Trump's ire with law firms. Its leaders balked at allowing then partner Todd ...

[### Venerable New York Firm That Struck a Deal With Trump Is ...

WSJ

https://www.wsj.com › U.S. › Law](https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/new-york-law-firm-cadwalader-wickersham-taft-trump-10a87928?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=ASWzDAjYbbQOS3pzBcnn0eU2Zmhlg5Cr7PGTCNtkmG8rVn8kOxlStwyXqPKBGriK-4o%3D&gaa_ts=6838e371&gaa_sig=DqD1XTlBxIOdCIKnGd7dcl3EA-2_sK2uFsAdQKJKAEu_L-nug2ZtNDtZEHfuiwWOxi2RGGj2qWKMhU0JF6ljxg%3D%3D)

May 8, 2025 — Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft struck a deal with President Trump last month intended to secure the future of New York's oldest law firm.

[### Famed NY Law Firm Bleeding Employees as Trump Deal ...

The Daily Beast

https://www.thedailybeast.com › famed-ny-law-firm-blee...](https://www.thedailybeast.com/famed-ny-law-firm-bleeding-employees-as-trump-deal-backfires/)

May 9, 2025 — Cadwalader, NY's oldest firm, made the deal to skate punitive damages made by Trump's February flurry of executive orders targeting law firms ...

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadwalader,_Wickersham_%26_Taft

bro of pres:

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP is New York City's oldest law firm[4][5] and one of the oldest continuously operating legal practices in the United States.[6] Attorney John Wells founded the practice in 1792. Cadwalader's Lower Manhattan headquarters is one of eight offices in four countries. At the end of 2014, the firm had approximately 450 attorneys and was ranked by The American Lawyer as one of the top 100 American law firms by revenue.

Contents

  [hide] 

Overview

New York City's oldest law firm,[4][5] Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft is headquartered at 200 Liberty Street in Lower Manhattan.[1] The firm's managing partner, Patrick Quinn, oversees approximately 450 attorneys as of year-end 2014.[3] It operates out of eight offices across theUnited States, Europe and Asia. In addition to its Wall Street location, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft has offices in Washington, D.C., Houston, Charlotte, London, Beijing, Hong Kong andBrussels.[2] In 2014, Cadwalader generated $481.5 million,[3] with a profit per partner of $2.21 million.[7]

History

In 1792, attorney John Wells, a Princeton graduate who was one of approximately 80 lawyers in New York City at the time, founded the law firm that ultimately became known as Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft.[8] The firm became a partnership called Wells & Strong[9] in 1818 when George Washington Strong joined Wells' practice.[8]

Wells' death in 1823[5] prompted Strong to bring in George Griffin as partner. Griffin then left in 1838 and George Washington Strong partnered with Marshall Bidwell.[10] George Washington Strong's son, George Templeton Strong, a lawyer and noted diarist, joined the firm in 1844. The firm became known as Strong, Bidwell & Strong.[11] The firm became Bidwell & Strong in 1855 after George Washington Strong's death.[10] Charles E. Strong, George Templeton Strong's cousin, became the firm's chief in the 1870s. During his tenure, he considered shuttering the firm and moving from law to banking.[8] In 1878, Strong partnered with John Lambert Cadwalader, who wasassistant secretary of state during President Ulysses S. Grant's administration.[8]

George W. Wickersham, an antitrust lawyer, joined the firm in 1883[5] and made partner in 1887.[8]Wickersham was named U.S. Attorney General under President William Howard Taft.[8] Henry W. Taft, President Taft's brother, began working at Cadwalader in 1889.[5] He became partner in 1899 and served as special assistant to the U.S. Attorney General from 1905 to 1907.[12] The firm became known as Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft in 1914.[8]

In the 1930s, Cadwalader was involved with the custody trial determining the guardianship of Gloria Vanderbilt.[8][13] Catherine Noyes Lee became Cadwalader's first female partner in 1942.[8]

Cadwalader expanded its footprint as the firm opened an office in Charlotte, North Carolina, in 1996,[2] established a London presence in 1997[14] and opened its first office in China—in Beijing—in 2005.[15]

Following the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, Cadwalader assisted families of those killed,[17] including immigrant families.[18] A portion of the firm's post-9/11 work occurred when attorneys learned there was no central resource for families seeking benefits; as a result, Cadwalader lawyers put together the "Handbook of Public and Private Assistance Resources for the Victims and Families of the World Trade Center Attacks", which was released in November 2001.[17] The firm released an expanded version the following year.[17]

In the mid-1990s, a group of young partners formed what some at Cadwalader referred to as Project Rightsize, an effort from 1994 to 1995 to remove less productive partners.[16] The group shuttered Cadwalader's office inPalm Beach, Florida, and reduced a branch in Los Angeles, California. In all, 17 partners, nearly 20 percent, left the firm.[16] Critics said the move was driven by individuals' financial interests and two former partners successfully sued Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft for violating its partnership agreement.[16]

During the financial crisis of 2007 to 2008, Cadwalader reduced its number of lawyers by about 20 percent in 2008. A Wall Street Journal reporter suggested the move was meant to lower operating costs as demand for its services decreased. Then-Chairman W. Christopher White stated, "There was a bubble, we rode that bubble, it contracted, and we adjusted".[19] Also during the fiscal crisis, Cadwalader attorneys served as advisers for the U.S. Treasury as Chrysler and General Motors restructured.[20] Cadwalader expanded in China with a Hong Kong office in 2010.[21] In 2011, it opened offices in Houston[22] and Brussels.[23]

In 2013, James C. Woolery left JP Morgan Chase for Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft. The next year, Woolery was selected to take over as the firm's new chairman starting in 2015.[24] In January 2015, when the chairman-elect was slated to take the chairman's post, the firm announced Woolery had left Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft to launch a hedge fund.[3] The firm eliminated the chairman position and Managing Partner Patrick Quinn began overseeing the firm.[3]

Areas of practice

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft's practices cover varying areas of law, including: antitrust, capital markets, corporate, energy and commodities, finance, financial restructuring, financial services,health care/not-for-profit, intellectual property, litigation, tax and private wealth, and white collar defense and investigations.[25] The fim has long-standing client relationships with premier financial institutions, Fortune 500 companies, government entities, charitable and health care organizations, and private clients.[26] The firm also takes on pro bono assignments, providing attorneys for non-profit organizations, including those assisting women, children and immigrants.[27][28]

One of the firm's highest-profile pro bono clients was Nobel laureate Malala Yousafzai.[29]Cadwalader began representing the female education activist in 2012, while she was seventeen years old and still hospitalized by a Taliban shooting. The firm continued to represent her for two years, ultimately establishing the Malala Fund, a nonprofit organization advocating for women's access to education.[29]

===

John J. Walsh

==

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft is a law and lobby firm with offices in Washington DC, New York, London, and Charlotte.

Cadwalader was hired by Enron push a deregulation agenda in Washington. However, it appears that Enron failed to register Cadwalader employees as lobbyists according to the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995. Cadwalader "contacted government officials on behalf of Enron and set up meetings between Enron and the President's Working Group on Financial Markets about proposed amendments to the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1999 and 2000. Enron sought to add amendments that would permit large-scale retail energy trading and derivatives contracts to be made in deregulated markets, and reclassify those derivatives so they would be counted as larger assets in bankruptcy proceedings." [1]

Contact

1201 F STREET, N.W SUITE 1100

WASHINGTON, DC 20004, USA

Phone: 1 202 862 2200

Fax: 1 202 862 2400

Email: cwtinfo AT cwt.com

Web: http:/www.cadwalader.com/

---

Related SourceWatch resources

External links

Categories:

---

bk review

As a result of news organizations being profit driven, any issue that might threaten the quarterly income statement is shied away from, or avoided completely, especially controversial investigative pieces in which lawyers who represent the targets of the news stories threaten to sue the parent corporation. For example, Jane Akre describes in her essay “The Fox, the Hounds, and the Sacred Cows,” how Fox Newscovered up her story on a company called Monsanto that manufactures a growth hormone called Posilac (rBGH) which is injected into cows so they can produce more milk. The issue that she wrote about was that the milk produced by the injected cows contains a higher amount of a certain growth hormone (IGF-1) than milk produced from cows that are not injected. She states the following:

But here’s a primary concern of scientists around the world: IGF-1 doesn’t differentiate between “good cells” and “bad cells” and is known to stimulate the growth of cancerous cells as well. So will it promote the growth of cancerous cells in those drinking the supercharged milk? [p. 40]

Jane Akre believed she had an important story on her hands, as I imagine any reader might, in her place. Could the milk a parent buys for his or her child cause cancer is a question I’m sure everyone would want an answer to, naiveté aside. Unfortunately, the threat of litigation prevented discussion, let alone the beginning of an answer to the question Akre was asking.

Friday evening before the scheduled airdate, Steve and I were called to the news directors office. “Read this,” he said, handing us a fax. It was a letter from a New York law firm, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, addressed to Roger Ailes, president of Fox News in New York. It was written on behalf of the firms client, Monsanto Company, and John Walsh, the lawyer who authorized the letter, minced no words. […] He charged that we had conducted ourselves unethically in the field. And to make sure nobody missed the point, the attorney also reminded Fox News’ chief that our behavior as investigative journalists was particularly dangerous in the “aftermath of the Food Lion vedict.” He was referring, of course, to the then recent case against ABC News that sent a frightening chill through every newsroom in America. The Food Lion verdict showed that even with irrefutable evidence from a hidden camera documenting the doctoring of potentially unsafe food sold to unsuspecting shoppers, a news organization that dares to expose a giant corporation could still lose big in court. [p. 41-42]

Akre goes on to describe her fight with Fox News to prevent the story’s demise by semantic sterilization such as:

'A risk of cancer?' You don’t need to use that word, said company lawyers. Instead, call it 'human health implications.' The credentials of our scientists critical of the Monsanto product? We don’t need their credentials, just call him a 'scientist from Wisconsin.' [p. 47]

In the end, the story was never aired on Fox News and Akre’s contract was not renewed. This is a fairly chilling revelation regardless of whether you watch Fox News or not, at least it was for this reader.

---

Former Maryland attorney general Douglas F. Gansler (D) has jumped law firms.

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, an international firm with a handful of offices, announced Monday that Gansler has joined the firm as a partner in the Global Litigation Group and the White Collar Defense and Investigations practice in Washington, D.C.

Gansler will head Cadwalader’s State Attorneys General practice. He joins the firm from Buckley LLP, where he was a partner.

Gansler was attorney general from 2007-2015 and lost a bid for the Democratic nomination for governor in 2014. He previously served eight years as Montgomery County state’s attorney, and also worked for the U.S. Justice Department.

---

---

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/weekly-standard/mission-to-moscow

wow WE

oN APRIL 7 THECAMPAIGN for America's Future, a liberal group, bought a full-page ad in the conservative Washington Times. The ad displays photos of Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, Dwight Eisenhower, and Tom DeLay. "Once upon a time," the ad begins, "conservatives stood for honest government. . . . Now, their chosen leader"--that would be DeLay, the House majority leader--"is the symbol of money and corruption in Washington."

The ad appeared the day after both the New York Times and the Washington Post recycled moldy charges against DeLay in front-page stories. It was all part of an ongoing effort to discredit the Texas Republican, who has been admonished by the House Ethics committee more times than any other member of Congress but whose main offense seems to have been success: boosting the power of his party, passing legislation Democrats don't like, and raising large amounts of money.

Some of that money goes to his family. The New York Times story--"Political Groups Paid Two Relatives of House Leader"--reported that DeLay's wife and daughter have been paid more than $500,000 as employees of his political action committees since 2001.But, as DeLay's staff was quick to observe, employing your husband, wife, son, or daughter and paying them with campaign funds violates no law or congressional ethics rule--and, according to the Los Angeles Times, at least 39 members of Congress do it, from both parties.

Meanwhile the April 6 Washington Post story highlighted an August 1997 "fact-finding" mission DeLay, his wife, and top staff took to Moscow. According to forms DeLay's staff filed with the House travel office, the trip was paid for by the National Center for Public Policy Research, a conservative nonprofit on Capitol Hill. The trip lasted six days and cost about $60,000. The Post story distilled and strengthened reporting from the March 18 edition of National Journal's CongressDaily. CongressDaily's article cited "two sources familiar with travel planning," and began: "An August 1997 trip to Moscow by then-House Majority Whip DeLay and four congressional staffers was funded largely by a Russian energy firm or a key affiliate which was a client of former lobbyist Jack Abramoff."

Abramoff, as all Washington insiders know, is under investigation by the Justice Department, the Interior Department, the IRS, the FBI, a special interagency task force, and the Senate Finance and Indian Affairs committees, among others, for allegedly defrauding Indian gaming interests of somewhere between $66 and $88 million (see Andrew Ferguson's "A Lobbyist's Progress," The Weekly Standard, Dec. 20, 2004). Until recently Abramoff sat on the board of the National Center for Public Policy Research. In 1997, when the Center bankrolled Delay's trip to Russia, he was employed as a lobbyist at the firm Preston Gates Ellis& Rouvelas Meeds LLP. House rules forbid members from having travel bills paid for by lobbyists.

Sometime in early 1997 Abramoff registered as a lobbyist for Chelsea Commercial Enterprises Ltd. Chelsea was incorporated--here the documentary record is contradictory--either in the Bahamas or in Jersey, an island in the English Channel that is known for its lax financial disclosure laws. In his registration, Abramoff specified that Chelsea was paying him to build "support for policies of the Russian government for progressive market reforms and trade with the United States." To that end he was paid $260,000 in 1997 and, according to the Post, "less than $10,000 in 1998." Chelsea also paid a New York law firm, Cadwalader,Wickersham & Taft LLP, $180,000 in '97 and about $30,000 between '98 and 2001 to work on its behalf.

"Another source" handed the Post reporters a memo taken from Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, dated May 6, 1997. In the memo, Ellen S. Levinson, then a lobbyist for Chelsea at Cadwalader, outlines a year-long schedule of junkets to Russia. The six junketsmentioned in Levinson's memo, the Post reported, included a trip for an "advance team" in May 1997, a visit by journalists and foreign policy wonks in June, and a trip by DeLay in August. Abramoffwas cc'd on the memo.

DeLay's chief of staff at the time, Ed Buckham, may have been part of that "advance team." In a January 21, 1998, AP story (headline: "You Won't Find Congressional Travelers in Coach"),Buckham,who now runs his own lobbying firm, said he had taken the Concorde from Paris to Washington in July 1997 after visiting Russia in advance of his boss. Buckham said his Concorde ticket, like the August 1997 junket, was paid for by the National Center for Public Policy Research. "We told the travel agent to just find the best flight," Amy Ridenour, the president of the National Center, told AP at the time. "Ed took the Concorde. I didn't realize that's what the travel agent picked."

But where did the National Center get the money? The Wall Street Journal's David Rogers provided an answer on April 13. "The Russia trip was covered from an estimated $165,000 payment [to the center] from an international law firm seeking to promote exchanges with Russian businessmen," Rogers wrote--which would suggest the firm in question was the New York-based Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft. But it could also have been another firm, of course--Abramoff's, perhaps, or one friendly to Abramoff, who was friendly with Ridenour. Both were friends of DeLay's.

Wherever the money ultimately came from, the trip was a success. DeLay, his wife, and his top staff were joined in Moscow first by Ridenour, then Abramoff, then Julius Kaplan, a lawyer on the Chelsea account at Cadwalader. They golfed, met with Russian religious leaders, visited tourist attractions, andspoke with Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin.One night the group attended a sumptuous dinner party hosted by the heads of NaftaSib, a Russian energy company. DeLay met NaftaSib's president, Alexander Koulakovsky, and its executive vice president, Marina Nevskaya. NaftaSib was another client of Abramoff's at Preston Gates.

Little is known about NaftaSib's executives. Alexander Koulakovsky "graduated from Odessa Technological Institute in 1975," according to his company's literature, and left the Russian oil giant SibNeft in 1993 to start NaftaSib. Other than that I could find only an October 26, 1994, dispatch from Tass, the Russian news agency, which reported that anAlexander Koulakovsky was "arrested by authorities of Hatichohe, Northern Honshu, Japan, . . . for illegal storage of a handgun and 150 rounds of ammunition."

Even less is known about Marina Nevskaya. The NaftaSib promotional material says she "taught at the Military Diplomatic Academy and lectured at Moscow State University" until 1991, when the Soviet Union collapsed. Apparently she is "the author of several publications on the economy of Southeast Asia, economic cooperation between the USSR and Asian countries and textbooks on oriental languages." She is fluent, we are told, "in English, Vietnamese and French." There is no record of her in the Nexis news database prior to 2005.

Except this. The August 23, 2004, issue of the Russian Oil and Gas Report had an article on NaftaSib's bid to buy the remnants of YUKOS, the giant Russian oil firm run by Mikhail Khodorkovsky until he became a prisoner of the Russian government. The article--published six months before the latest controversy over DeLay--contains this aside:

The names of Kulakovsky and Nevskaya, not very well known in Russia, are sufficiently well known in the U.S. Thus, in 1997 Naftasib paid for the Moscow part of the visit of leader of the house of representative of the US Congress Tom DeLay. Nevskaya accompanied DeLay on that visit to Moscow.

If NaftaSib paid for DeLay's trip, however, it did so indirectly. And thus we--and DeLay's critics--reach an impasse. Looking back, lobbyists were involved in the planning and execution of DeLay's trip to Russia; Russian energy interests took credit for the trip; the only question is who paid for it.

And that question has already been answered, more or less: the National Center for Public Policy Research. And according to the House rules, as long as lobbyists don't pay a congressman's expenses directly, everything is peachy. Were all such congressional trips to receive the level of scrutiny applied to DeLay's Russia boondoggle, it's safe to say, few of his colleagues would escape censure.

As Amy Ridenour said in a statement last week: "The National Center for Public Policy Researchwas careful to pay all the expenses associated with Congressman DeLay's trip." If that's so, DeLay may still be a symbol of the unappealing intersection of money and politics in Washington. But symbolism has never been a firing offense.

Matthew Continetti is a staff writer at The Weekly Standard.

Matthew Continetti Magazine

---

---